DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02/21/2024, and 10/03/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “enable to perform temperature-rise-suppression output limitation control” is indefinite because the meets and bounds of the claim are not clearly defined.
Further regarding claim 1, the terms “a usage state” is indefinite because the specification does not provide a special definition for this term. Although dependent claims later recite charging and discharging states, claim 1 does not specify whether the term “usage state” is limited to charging and discharging states or encompasses additional states; accordingly, the meets and bounds of the claim are not clear and the claim is indefinite.
Further regarding claim 1, the terms “a battery state” is indefinite because the specification does not provide a special definition for this term. Although dependent claims later recite a high remaining-charged-amount state and a low remaining-charged-amount state, claim 1 does not specify whether “a battery state” is limited to remaining-charged-amount states or encompasses additional battery conditions; accordingly, the meets and bounds of the claim are not clear and the claim is indefinite.
Claims 2-7 are similarly rejected for depending upon claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu (JP 2015033154 A, citation from enclosed machine translation), and further in view of Nishide et al.(US 20220013846 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shimizu teaches a power supply system ([0025]; Fig. 1; power unit 1) comprising: a battery pack including a battery cell ([0025]; Fig. 1; vehicle drive secondary battery 2); and a battery control device configured to control power on charge and discharge of the battery pack ([0028-0029]; Figs 1, 3; charge/discharge control device 10), and the battery control device is configured to: enable to perform temperature-rise-suppression output limitation control in which an output opening rate of the battery pack is limited in a case where a temperature of the battery pack is equal to or higher than a control start temperature ([0009-0011], [0028-0030]); and set the control start temperature based on a usage state of the battery pack and a battery state of the battery pack in the temperature-rise-suppression output limitation control ([0014, 0034]).
Specifically, Shimizu teaches performing charging/discharging limitation by restricting the input/output current of the battery when the battery temperature reaches predetermined charge and discharge start temperatures. Shimizu further teaches determining the Battey state based on state of charge (SOC: State Of Charge, that is, the ratio of remaining capacity to full charge capacity) and battery deterioration state (SOH) and adjusting the charge/discharge restriction control according to those battery states ([0014, 0034-0035). Accordingly, Shimizu teaches temperature based output limitation control in which the battery output is limited when the battery temperature reaches a control start temperature.
Shimizu does not specifically disclose a solid-state battery and instead discusses temperature control of batteries generally, without reference to structural features specific to solid-state batteries. Accordingly, Shimizu is silent with respect to claimed restraining member configured to restrain the solid-state battery cell. Thus, Shimizu does not teach a battery pack including a solid-state battery cell and a restraining member configured to restrain the solid-state battery cell; wherein during a charge of the battery pack, the restraining member is compressed due to expansion of the solid-state battery cell, and a surface pressure applied to the solid-state battery cell is increased, during a discharge of the battery pack, the restraining member is restored due to contraction of the solid-state battery cell, and the surface pressure applied to the solid-state battery cell is decreased.
However, Nishide teaches a solid state battery ([0014-0015], Fig. 1) including a covering insulation layer formed of an elastic material that function as a buffer during expansion and contraction of the solid-state battery ([0070-0074], [0120-0124], Fig. 3), corresponds to the claimed restraining member. Nishide further teaches a temperature control circuit and temperature detecting means for controlling the temperature of the solid state battery to improve charging and discharging efficiency ([0086-0089], Fig. 4C).
Further, Nishide, and Shimizu are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both references are directed to temperature control of batteries.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would modify the power supply system of Shimizu by employing the solid state battery structure of Nishide, including the elastic covering insulation layer that accommodates expansion and contraction of the solid state battery to suppress the cracking during charging and discharging as taught by Nishide ([0120-0121]).
Regarding claim 2, Shimizu, as modified by Nishide, teaches all limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Shimizu further teaches a limitation wherein the usage state of the battery pack includes charge and discharge states of the battery pack, and the battery state of the battery pack includes a remaining charged amount of the battery pack ([0004, 0010, 0034]).
Specifically, Shimizu teaches that the usage state includes charging and discharging states, and that the battery state is determined based on the state of charge (SOC), the ratio of remaining capacity to full charge capacity ([0010, 0004, 0010, 0034]).
Claims 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu, as modified by Nishide, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Ueki (US 20110270477 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Shimizu, as modified by Nishide, teaches all limitations of claim 2 as stated above. Shimizu further teaches a limitation wherein the battery control device is configured to: classify the usage state of the battery pack into a discharge state and a charge state, based on the charge and discharge states of the battery pack; classify the battery state of the battery pack into a high remaining-charged-amount state and a low remaining-charged-amount state, based on the remaining charged amount of the battery pack; and set the control start temperature in the temperature-rise-suppression output limitation control, based on whether the usage state of the battery pack is the discharge state or the charge state ([0004], [0010-0011], [0014-0015], [0029], [0032-0034]).
Specifically, Shimizu teaches classifying the usage state of the battery pack into charging and discharging states by performing charge/discharge control during charging and discharging operations ([0010-0011], [0029], [0032-0034]). Shimizu further teaches classifying the battery state based on the state of charge (SOC), the ratio of the remaining capacity to the full charge capacity, and determining whether the SOC is equal to or less than a predetermined value ([0004], [0014-0015], [0034]). Shimizu further teaches performing charge/discharge restriction control based on the charging/discharging state and the determined state of charge (SOC) as a threshold, thereby setting the charge restriction start temperature and the discharge restriction start temperature according to charging/discharging battery states.
Modified Shimizu does not teach setting the control start temperature in the temperature-rise-suppression output limitation control, based on whether the battery state of the battery pack is the high remaining-charged-amount state or the low remaining-charged-amount state.
In other words, Shimizu teaches setting different control start temperatures based on whether the battery is in charging state or a discharge state ([0029-0032]). Shimizu further teaches determining the SOC and comparing the determined SOC with a predetermined value to perform charge/discharge control ([0034]). Modified Shimizu does not teach setting the control start temperature based on different remaining charged amount SOC states, such as setting different control start temperature for high and low remaining charged amount.
However, Ueki teaches determining current limitation thresholds using battery temperature-SOC dependency maps during charging and discharging states ([0169-0171, 0186], Figs. 12, 13). Specifically, Ueki teaches that the charge and discharge threshold current vary as functions of both battery temperature and the battery state of charge (SOC) ([0187-0190], Figs. 17, 18). Accordingly, Ueki teaches generating battery temperature -SOC dependency maps from these relationships to determine the appropriate threshold current according to the battery operation condition during charging and discharging ([0189-0190]) to ultimately prevent deterioration of the battery caused by high rate charging-discharging while improving battery performance ([0002]).
Further, modified Shimizu and Ueki are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both references are directed to improving charging and discharging efficiency while protecting the Battey from deterioration during charging and discharging.
Since Ueki teaches that battery current limitation threshold during charging and discharging are dependent on both battery temperature and battery state of charge through temperature-SOC dependency maps, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to establish different control start temperature for different remaining charged amount conditions during charging and discharging.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would modify the power supply system of modified Shimizu by incorporating the SOC dependent threshold control taught by Ueki in order to prevent deterioration of the battery caused by high rate charging-discharging while improving battery performance ([0002]). Therefore the combined teaching of Ueki and modified Shimizu discloses the subject matter of claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, Shimizu, as modified by Nishide and Ueki, teaches all limitations of claim 3 as stated above. Shimizu further teaches a limitation wherein the battery control device sets the control start temperature for a case where the usage state of the battery pack is the charge state to be higher than the control start temperature for a case where the usage state of the battery pack is the discharge state, in the temperature-rise-suppression output limitation control ([0010, 0029, 0032], Fig. 2).
Specifically, Shimizu teaches setting the discharge restriction start temperature lower than the charge restriction start temperature, such that the control start temperature during charging is higher than the control start temperature during discharging ([0010, 0029, 0032], Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Shimizu, as modified by Nishide and Ueki, teaches all limitations of claim 4 as stated above. Modified Shimizu further teaches a limitation wherein in the temperature-rise-suppression output limitation control, when the usage state of the battery pack is the discharge state, the battery control device sets the control start temperature for a case where the battery state of the battery pack is the high remaining-charged-amount state to be higher than the control start temperature for a case where the battery state of the battery pack is the low remaining-charged-amount state.
Ueki teaches determining current limitation thresholds using battery temperature-SOC dependency maps during charging and discharging states ([0169-0171, 0186], Figs. 12, 13). Specifically, Ueki teaches that the charge and discharge threshold current vary as functions of both battery temperature and the battery state of charge (SOC) ([0187-0190], Figs. 17, 18). Accordingly, Ueki teaches generating battery temperature -SOC dependency maps from these relationships to determine the appropriate threshold current according to the battery operation condition during charging and discharging ([0189-0190]) to ultimately prevent deterioration of the battery caused by high rate charging-discharging while improving battery performance ([0002]).
Since Ueki teaches that battery current limitation threshold during charging and discharging are dependent on both battery temperature and battery state of charge through temperature-SOC dependency maps, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to establish different control start temperature for different remaining charged amount conditions during charging and discharging. The particular relationship between the respective control start temperature for high and low remaining charge amount states represents no more than routine optimization of known variables to achieve the desired balance between battery protection, and charging/discharging efficacy. See MPEP 2144.05(II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would modify the power supply system of modified Shimizu by incorporating the SOC dependent threshold control during discharging state taught by Ueki in order to prevent deterioration of the battery caused by high rate charging-discharging while improving battery performance ([0002]).
Regarding claim 6, Shimizu, as modified by Nishide, teaches all limitations of claim 4 as stated above. Modified Shimizu further teaches a limitation wherein in the temperature-rise-suppression output limitation control, when the usage state of the battery pack is the charge state, the battery control device sets the control start temperature for a case where the battery state of the battery pack is the low remaining-charged-amount state to be higher than the control start temperature set for a case where the battery state of the battery pack is the high remaining-charged-amount state.
Ueki teaches determining current limitation thresholds using battery temperature-SOC dependency maps during charging and discharging states ([0169-0171, 0186], Figs. 12, 13). Specifically, Ueki teaches that the charge and discharge threshold current vary as functions of both battery temperature and the battery state of charge (SOC) ([0187-0190], Figs. 17, 18). Accordingly, Ueki teaches generating battery temperature-SOC dependency maps from these relationships to determine the appropriate threshold current according to the battery operation condition during charging and discharging ([0189-0190]) to ultimately prevent deterioration of the battery caused by high rate charging-discharging while improving battery performance ([0002]).
Since Ueki teaches that battery current limitation threshold during charging and discharging are dependent on both battery temperature and battery state of charge through temperature-SOC dependency maps, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to establish different control start temperature for different remaining charged amount conditions during charging and discharging. The particular relationship between the respective control start temperature for high and low remaining charge amount states represents no more than routine optimization of known variables to achieve the desired balance between battery protection, and charging/discharging efficacy. See MPEP 2144.05(II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would modify the power supply system of modified Shimizu by incorporating the SOC dependent threshold control during charging state taught by Ueki in order to prevent deterioration of the battery caused by high rate charging-discharging while improving battery performance ([0002]).
Regarding claim 7, Shimizu, as modified by Nishide and Ueki, teaches all limitations of claim 3 as stated above. Modified Shimizu further teaches a limitation wherein in the temperature-rise-suppression output limitation control, the control start temperature is set such that T2 < T1 < T4 < T3, where T1 is the control start temperature for a case where the usage state of the battery pack is the discharge state and the battery state of the battery pack is the high remaining-charged-amount state, T2 is the control start temperature for a case where the usage state of the battery pack is the discharge state and the battery state of the battery pack is the low remaining-charged-amount state, T3 is the control start temperature for a case where the usage state of the battery pack is the charge state and the battery state of the battery pack is the low remaining-charged-amount state, and T4 is the control start temperature for a case where the usage state of the battery pack is the charge state and the battery state of the battery pack is the high remaining-charged-amount state.
Ueki teaches determining current limitation thresholds using battery temperature-SOC dependency maps during charging and discharging states ([0169-0171, 0186], Figs. 12, 13). Specifically, Ueki teaches that the charge and discharge threshold current vary as functions of both battery temperature and the battery state of charge (SOC) ([0187-0190], Figs. 17, 18). Accordingly, Ueki teaches generating battery temperature-SOC dependency maps from these relationships to determine the appropriate threshold current according to the battery operation condition during charging and discharging ([0189-0190]) to ultimately prevent deterioration of the battery caused by high rate charging-discharging while improving battery performance ([0002]).
Since Ueki teaches that battery current limitation threshold during charging and discharging are dependent on both battery temperature and battery state of charge through temperature-SOC dependency maps, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to establish different control start temperature for different remaining charged amount conditions during charging and discharging. The particular relationship between the respective control start temperature for high and low remaining charge amount states during charging and discharging represents no more than routine optimization of known variables to achieve the desired balance between battery protection, and charging/discharging efficacy. See MPEP 2144.05(II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would modify the power supply system of modified Shimizu by incorporating the SOC dependent threshold control during charging and discharging state taught by Ueki in order to prevent deterioration of the battery caused by high rate charging-discharging while improving battery performance ([0002]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lili Rassouli whose telephone number is (571)272-9760. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM-4:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew T Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LILI RASSOULI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights